Revolving Board Room Doors and Hoodies.

The beginning of this month provided a front row, edge of your seat and whodunit suspense in the Kenyan production of “Now You See Me, Now You Don’t”. In case you missed it, the twists and turns were worthy of inclusion in the Safari Rally circuit and would have been aptly played out in a two-part episode of the local television drama Vioja Mahakamani. It was mesmerizing watching the board room politics of a public institution called the National Hospital Insurance Fund dragged in front of television cameras, allowing the general public a peek into what should never have been exposed to our blissfully ignorant minds. Truth be told, it was not mesmerizing. It was sordid, ghastly and abominable. Just like parents never allow children into their bedroom after hours, a board of directors should never allow outsiders into their inner sanctum no matter how toxic the air is within it. Even if it means asphyxiating themselves on their own noxious fumes, they should only come out for air long enough to bring in a higher authority to help detoxify the situation.

That higher power never has been, and never will be, the media. That higher power is the appointing authority, which has its own channels of communication that do not require Bright Lights -Camera – Action. Sadly, all the players in this sorry saga know the corporate governance drill. But once the saga dies down and the media gets the next “hot” story no one will remember who was speaking on the side of good governance or who was blowing the whistle. All they will remember were puffed chests and a revolving CEO door that couldn’t rotate fast enough to keep up with the ejections. I wish all the actors within that board room the very best in proving to anyone who cares enough to listen that they are worthy of maintaining confidentiality in a professional setting. As they set off through the spinning exit door, now would be a good time to sign a tell-all book deal with a publisher with a title along the lines of “Loose lips sink ships”.

In other completely unrelated news, Mark Zuckerberg the 27-year old illustrious founder and CEO of Facebook had a corporate equivalent of a wardrobe malfunction during the pre-IPO roadshows with investors. The young chap wore a “hoodie” (a sweatshirt with a hood), sneakers and jeans to meetings with potential investors in the $5 billion IPO of Facebook, currently valued at around $100 billion. Michael Pachter, Managing Director of Wedburg Securities – the first company to issue a buy rating on the Facebook stock in the United States- called Zuckerberg’s choice of attire as “ a mark of immaturity”. Waxing puritanical Pachter stated, “I think he has to realize he’s bringing investors in as a new constituency right now, and I think he’s got to show them the respect they deserve because he’s asking them for their money.”

Now this is a quintessential chicken and egg situation. Zuckerberg needs the capital that will be raised from the IPO, but the investors need Zuckerberg and his team to drive the performance and deliver the revenues that will guarantee a payback on the investment being made. Clearly Zuckerberg will not deliver those revenues dressed in a silk tie and black leather brogues. Conversely, these investors seem affronted when he comes to request for money dressed in his work duds, the very attire that spurred him to oversee the building of a $100 billion company. Maybe it was the springy rubber soles that fired up his cerebral spark plugs. Or the relaxed blood flow from his heart to his head, unimpeded by that self-strangulation device masquerading as a tie. Whatever the case, perhaps some numbers may help you to see Zuckerberg’s point of view. Age of company: Eight years. Number of active users as at April 2012: 845 million. 2011 Turnover: $3.7 billion yielding earnings of $1 billion. Whether you call him immature or disrespectful, this young man brings home the dollar bills in the billions. Which then begs the question: who should set the dress code, the investor or the investee? Who plays the music and who dances the tune? If demand for the share outstrips supply by the time the proposed IPO date of May 17th comes around, well Zuckerberg can go dressed in nothing but boxers and socks come the day for ringing the bell at the New York Stock Exchange. Not even a hairy chest will distract from the fact that a virtual social network has iconoclastically changed the way humans socialize forever. If appetite for the share is depressed or dampened for any reason however, a three piece Savile Row suit might come in very handy for hiding the licked wounds.

Zuckerberg’s attire might appear as immature but he has $100 billion reasons why investors should look past his outward appearance and into what he has delivered in the past. It should also cause some reflection on the widening gap of perception and value systems between the three age generations currently in the working environment today. At the end of this technologically driven day, money talks and stuffy formalities walk [or so say the Gen-Y’s!]

[email protected]
Twitter: @carolmusyoka